Interesting Math problem for Christians and Atheists alike

According to the bible, God created Adam and Eve about 6000 years ago...Lets think about some maths:

Two people multiplying to 6.5 billion in 6000 years. Ignoring the whole flood thing, how many children would eve had needed to give birth to to allow for both the genetic variation and the current population of the planet?

Has anyone ever thought about this before? I might attempt the math myself sometime if no one has.

Replies to This Discussion

I don't actually think this is a good idea, but I'm guessing anyone that intended to really implement it would react to your refusal the same way a parent does when their child doesn't want to take medicine; either against your will, or without your knowledge.

Ha, I took the liberty to speak in broad generalizations due to the unlikeliness of this plan ever being implemented. Were it a detailed proposition being submitted to the UN, I'd have been more specific (promise). Though to be honest, if I was in a position to sign off on this thing, I probably couldn't do it. I know that "ends justify means" doesn't look the same on the ground.

Okay. Peculiar way of "generalizing" Africans. Indeed. Since this suggestion you made was already tried out in Europe and USA, and the results were nefarious, I don't think it would be taken into consideration for future purposes.

Tho, with the advancements in science now is possible to have a genetic test for diseases before getting married to your partner. Jews in New York have this test done to avoid chances of getting an hereditary disease that is common in them, But this is very different than sterilizing jews who carry that disease.

Yeah when I say "generalizing" I meant the source of HIV-- I know people on the continent of Africa don't generally have AIDS. Though I could see why you'd think I might have thought that. I'm an average American (... that's a bit of an exaggeration) who's about as aware of Africa as I am of immunity deficiencies.

At no point I assumed your idea was an "average American" point of view. This sort of idea has been around as early as the 1900's. I just happen to disagree with it because not even sterilizing "the source" of the virus would improve the situation. I think the best that can be done at this point is finding the cure.

Forget the math. If God created ONLY Adam and Eve, there would be no genetic variation at all (unless God invented mutation, which He failed to mention in the Bible). In fact, the incestuous expansion of the species almost certainly would have exterminated mankind with inherited diseases and disorders (hemophilia, anyone?) in only a few generations. It certainly makes the advanced ages attained by the next two dozen generations or so (depending upon which of the two relevant and contradictory gospels you choose to believe) of biblical men (women aren't mentioned) seem unlikely, doesn't it? If Genesis is inerrantly true, then it follows that the best way to live a long life is to engage in incest. Incidentally, I love to hear Christians try to explain where the wives of Cain (I don't think Abel made it to the altar) came from. The obvious answer, of course, is that they had carnal relations with their mother (Christian family values).

Christians seems to explain this by saying Adam and Eve had "pure" genes.

the best way to live a long life is to engage in incest.

Now, now....correlation is not causation after all...

Christians try to explain where the wives of Cain

My personal favourite is that Adam wasn't actually the first human... the double up in the bible actually refers first to human kind being created and put onto Earth, THEN secondly Adam being created and put into Eden.

When I started working on my family tree, I worked out that, with the number of people in the tree doubling with every generation and a generation taking 25 years (roughly), the number of ancestors I had in the year CE 1130 would be about 8.5 billion. If we go back another century, to CE 1030, there would be over 137 billion living ancestors, more people than have ever lived by a factor approaching 100%. If you wish to take the line back 6000 years rather than a mere 1000, you do the maths, but I am not convinced we have an argument here.